The Dark Side...

Oriel

Right,
I'm tempted to dump Nikon and go for Canon. Sell my cameras and lenses, buy a 20D or something and start again. Mainly due to ISO noise issues.
Dumb idea?

Steve.

PaulieC

why not just get one of the new Nikon bodies (d300 or D3 I think) ? They're supposed to improved the noise greatly, aren't they?

TelePaul

Was there a particular shot that prompted this?

DotOrg

the camera is not the problem, when you see a great picture, it's not because of the camera, it's because the photographer understands composition and how light works

are you only shooting in dark conditions? is noise a problem in your prints or just in 100% crops on your computer sceen?

Ricky91t

Have too say i use a canon eos 20D have noticed no noise yet but i rarely go up high in the iso i have read though that they have little niose and high iso's but is it worth it when you can just upgrade to a better nikon??

City-Exile

Come over to the light...
You know it's the right thing to do!

oshead

Invest in Noise Ninja and learn how to use it properly.

RCNPhotos

I use a 20D and I never go over 800 if I can help it. I find 1600 pretty noisey. but that's just me maybe. I've been thinking of getting noise ninja actually. how much is it?

oshead

RCNPhotos wrote: »

I use a 20D and I never go over 800 if I can help it. I find 1600 pretty noisey. but that's just me maybe. I've been thinking of getting noise ninja actually. how much is it?

Depends which version you are interested in... Noise Ninja.

RCNPhotos

Cheers for that. Can I ask which you use?

Fajitas!

To be honest Steve, I reckon you'll be looking at buying the 5D to get the lack of noise you need.

I was playing with DarrenG's D300 the other week, and shooting at 6400 - It was noisy alright, but then again, it was 6400. I think it's better at 1600.

That said, if you want to give my 5D a test run next time you're in Dublin, give me a shout. You won't be dissapointed in it - Nor the quality of L's

Noise Ninja isn't always the greatest application, from my own experience.

oshead

RCNPhotos wrote: »

Cheers for that. Can I ask which you use?

The Pro version.

thebaz

RCNPhotos wrote: »

I use a 20D and I never go over 800 if I can help it. I find 1600 pretty noisey. but that's just me maybe. I've been thinking of getting noise ninja actually. how much is it?

I use nikon, and find iso 800 too noisey , certainly wouldn't switch to Canon just to reduce noise and increase the iso capabalities , there are other ways ...

Paulw

As others have said, it takes more than just a good camera to make a good photographer. But, the Canon is certainly superior for noise. I use the 40D at ISO 1000 with minimal noise. Combine that with something like Noise Ninja and you will be laughing.

Of course, the new 5D Mk II due out in the new year should be even better again.

Well worth switching over from the dark side, to the light.

Oriel

cambo_gueno wrote: »

why not just get one of the new Nikon bodies (d300 or D3 I think) ? They're supposed to improved the noise greatly, aren't they?

I haven't taken too much interest in the reviews to be honest. I can't see them making up too much ground in such short a space of time...

TelePaul wrote: »

Was there a particular shot that prompted this?

No, just noise in general. I remember somebody who recently (possibly yourself) who posted up a Canon shot at ISO 1600, and there was little, if anyway, noticeable noise at all. My 1600 shots are terrible.

DotOrg wrote: »

the camera is not the problem, when you see a great picture, it's not because of the camera, it's because the photographer understands composition and how light works are you only shooting in dark conditions? is noise a problem in your prints or just in 100% crops on your computer sceen?

I think I'm a decent enough photographer. When I take the pictures, I think a lot of them are ruined by noise. I know that noise can be a good thing, under certain circumstances.

Most of my shots are gig shots, low light, and unpredictable situations.
I respect you as a photographer. But I've taken some decent shots at 1600, but, had I taken those at 400/800, they would have been ****e. A VR lens may have helped, but I'm looking for body first, lens later.
I look at nearly all of them on a Mac, I rarely print them.
I've a photo going into a German music publication, which will be fine, but I'd still like to be able to print my own shots up large.

I shot at a wedding recently (not officially) but when I look at my shots, I wish I didn't have such noice. The official photographer was a Canon user, though he had a 77mm (circ) lens...

oshead wrote: »

Invest in Noise Ninja and learn how to use it properly.

I don't want a software solution.

Fajitas! wrote:

To be honest Steve, I reckon you'll be looking at buying the 5D to get the lack of noise you need.

I was playing with DarrenG's D300 the other week, and shooting at 6400 - It was noisy alright, but then again, it was 6400. I think it's better at 1600.

For web/print, I'd never look at higher than 1600!

Fajitas! wrote:

That said, if you want to give my 5D a test run next time you're in Dublin, give me a shout. You won't be dissapointed in it - Nor the quality of L's

I'd need a crash course in Canon! I love my Nikon, that's why I think I'd be cheating on my D80 (It's already got a dead pixel on me, and I've already broken the card slot - it was in my bag when it broke!)

Masada

i dont have a lot of experience with canon cameras so cant really compare but i dont have a much trouble with noise on my D80, maybe talk in person with someone who knows their stuff so they can show you and you'll probably find things you might be doing wrong or just not in the right way and stuff, and also if you go canon you will just be ordinary and uninteresting.,
Nikon FTW,

bradnailer

Oriel wrote: »

Right,
I'm tempted to dump Nikon and go for Canon.
Steve.

What day are your bins collected and where do you live:D

If you've got a lot of kit I'd stay with the Nikon, post a few images there are plenty of folks here to help you sort out your noise problems

Fajitas!

Ah yes, that would most likely have been me posting the shots at 1600 and 3200 a few weeks back. I'd have no problem whatsoever printing 3200's. There's nothing wrong with the grain/noise if it works in the photo. And I don't think the Nikon noise is as nice as the Canon noise.

Canon supposedly dosn't have the same level as ergonomics as Nikon. I've never had a problem though, you'll get used to it quite fast. (Tbh, I don't think I could give up my directional pad for focusing)

Anywho, I've let your Flickr profile access my 100% photos, see what you think of the higher ISO's.

Won't be too hard to find them

stcstc

I shoot with a 30d & 40D

the problem I have with noise on both of them, when the noise gets bad it tends to also give a purple hue to the image, I wouldnt mind just the noise

georgey

How many images do we all take that are up in the 800-1600-3200 ISO???
I could count on one hand the amount of times I go up to that level, of course that is just my shooting applications and yours may differ, what I am saying is I think its all overkill stay with Nikon they make top cameras their new models D3 & D300 look great in the noise depot. Have you tried over exposing on your high ISO images? sometimes it pays to higher your ISO just to make sure you expose to the right of your histogram when you bring your raw file back to normal exposure the noise all but vanishes, you could try that?
Philip

Fajitas!

georgey wrote: »

How many images do we all take that are up in the 800-1600-3200 ISO???

70%+

nilhg

Fajitas! wrote: »

70%+

Do you think thats typical of a "socially active student", or just your own style.

sineadw

I'd be up around the 70% mark too, and that's with a 350D :rolleyes: Guess it depends on what you shoot...

Fajitas!

nilhg wrote: »

Do you think thats typical of a "socially active student", or just your own style.

My own style really, plus the times I'm most 'active' at/jobs I'm hired for most call for high ISO's

Paulw

georgey wrote: »

How many images do we all take that are up in the 800-1600-3200 ISO???

I'd say 70% or so. Even during daylight, for sport, I'd use around ISO 800 just to get a fast shutter speed. For bright days though, I'd turn it down to 400 or so. With floodlights, I'd use ISO 800 to 1600.

For wildlife photography, again a higher ISO to get a faster shutter speed.

For landscape stuff, low ISO since you can get a longer exposure.

So, it seems that many would use (or like to use) higher ISO settings.

Roen

Well if you can stretch to a D3 ........